MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914842949 · doi:10.1103/physreve.99.032402

Interspike interval correlations in networks of inhibitory integrate-and-fire neurons

2019· article· en· W2914842949 on OpenAlexafffund
Wilhelm Braun, André Longtin

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. E · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
KeywordsInhibitory postsynaptic potentialOscillation (cell signaling)ConductanceStatistical physicsNoise (video)CorrelationPhysicsInterval (graph theory)Current (fluid)MathematicsDiffusionBiological systemComputer scienceNeuroscienceArtificial intelligenceChemistryBiologyCombinatoricsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study temporal correlations of interspike intervals, quantified by the network-averaged serial correlation coefficient (SCC), in networks of both current- and conductance-based purely inhibitory integrate-and-fire neurons. Numerical simulations reveal transitions to negative SCCs at intermediate values of bias current drive and network size. As bias drive and network size are increased past these values, the SCC returns to zero. The SCC is maximally negative at an intermediate value of the network oscillation strength. The dependence of the SCC on two canonical schemes for synaptic connectivity is studied, and it is shown that the results occur robustly in both schemes. For conductance-based synapses, the SCC becomes negative at the onset of both a fast and slow coherent network oscillation. We then show by means of offline simulations using prerecorded network activity that a neuron's SCC is highly sensitive to its number of presynaptic inputs. Finally, we devise a noise-reduced diffusion approximation for current-based networks that accounts for the observed temporal correlation transitions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. ESame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207